This was posted in a forum responding to the story - this guy put it better than me:
Mineola is a very small town; it's hard to imagine something this big not being known about. Certainly, they knew about the "Swingers Club" and something of that nature in a small town...I suspect that the Mineola police department is only about 4 or 5 officers. The population of the city is under 6,000. Small towns of that size usually have poorly funded and undertrained police departments.
Ironically, according to Wikipedia, "Before 1873 the place was called Sodom."
However, I am having a bit of trouble actually believing this. It has all the earmarks of the infamous McMartin Preschool case in which the supposed victim children were fed the stories they testified to by the investigators and counsellors. False memories about events that never happened were instilled in the impressionable children by "therapists" who asked them leading questions, provided possible scenarios of depraved activities, and suggested the "correct" answers to children who wanted to please the adult therapists.
How did the "swing" club go about recruiting an audience for such a performance. Even swingers would most likely immediately report such child sexual abuse to the authorities. Swingers are generally interested in sex with other adults, not with children.
There was a mention of one of the children saying they had been video taped in their "performances." Was this video tape found? Was it used at trial? I saw no references to its use as evidence. It's a strange omission from the story if it was used.
I don’t see the earmarks of McMartin Preschool case that you listed in this case.The evidence reported in these very poorly written newspaper articles appears to be only the testimony of the children. Other testimony was that of the landlord for the "Mineola Swingers Club" property who said when she found out it was being used for swinging, evicted them. Another was that years after the eviction, investigators found children's clothing and a book in the trash behind the building—a building that HAD been previously used as a children's day care center. Hardly probative. The rest of the evidence was the testimony of the foster mother, therapists, and investigators.
What physical evidence exists? Where are the video tapes? Video tapes are made so the taper can either re-view the event at a later time... or in this case for possible sale to the attending perverts. Were they found? If not, why not? What about medical examinations of the children showing penetration or other indications of damage? Where are the "costumes" that the children testified they wore for some of the "dances?"
In one report of a child's testimony, the child was directly quoted as saying they were taught how to touch their "private parts" and the "private parts" of their siblings. This is not the language that perverts would have taught them. The child also testified that they were taught using dolls before escalating to touching themselves and others. Dolls are much more likely to be used as exemplars in therapy and child abuse investigations. I don't see these adults who have been convicted of these crimes as being sophisticated enough to develop such an educational plan for their victims. To me, it seems more likely that the child may have added the dolls as props to his/her story from the experience of being asked to use them to demonstrate what was done to them or that they did.
This is exactly the type of testimonial evidence and really complete lack of physical evidence that raised serious questions in the McMartin Preschool case.
As I mentioned, how exactly do you build a business plan around the sexual exploitation of children in exchange for money? How do you advertise for your audience without the risk of someone reporting it? How do you find your fellow perverts to participate in this business? How do you bring the subject up with someone you suspect might be interested in seeing such a show? In a town of fewer than 6,000 people? Is this logical?
In the McMartin case, the children testified about perverted events taking place throughout the day—while parents dropped off and picked up kids, walked into classrooms, etc., and saw nothing amiss. The McMartin children also testified about video taping and actually watching replays of sexual activities and animal sacrifices on video... yet no video equipment was found at the site and NO videos were ever found. None of the children showed any physical indications of sexual abuse. It was this lack of logic to the case that caused people to look harder into the evidence and eventually resulted in all of the convicted people being pardoned and freed. All of the McMartin case was predicated solely on the testimony of the children that had actually been created by the investigators.
Were these people drug users? Probably. Were they swingers? Probably. Were they child abusers? Possibly. These newspaper reports do not provide enough information to say for sure. My BS-O-Meter was pegging over on some of the claims simply because most people don't act this way... and to increase the criminal activity to an audience without having ever had anyone call the authorities in the face of a well recognized crime is hard to swallow. It defies logic.